World Steel Products Corp.

In the Matter Of WORLD STEEL PRODUCTS CORPORATION and ARCHI- TECTURAL & ENGINEERING GUILD, LOCAL 66, IFTEA & DU, A. F. or L. Case No. B-2027. -Decided October 8, 1940 Jurisdiction : door, frame, trim and timber product manufacturing industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: dis- pute as to appropriate unit; election necessary. Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : all employees in the technical 'or engineering department including draftsmen, the supervisory draftsman, the lister or scheduler, if any, the production engineer, and the assistant to the production engineer, but excluding estimators, assistant superintendents of construction, and the shop foreman and his assistant. Mr. J. B. Sussman., of New York City, for the Company. Mr. J. Lawrence Raimist, of New York City, for the Union. .Miss Edna Loeb, of counsel to the Board: DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE On July 15, 1940, Architectural & Engineering Guild, Local 66, International Federation of Technical Engineers', Architects', & Draftsmen's Unions, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called" the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Second Region (New York City), a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of, em- ployees of World Steel Products Corporation, New York City, herein called. the Company, and requesting an 'investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act_ On August 10, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National "Labor Relations Board Rules; and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an 27 N. L. R. B.. No. 132. 701 702 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD appropriate hearing upon due notice. On August 13, 1940, the Union filed with the Regional Director an amended petition.' On August 13, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear- ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and the Union. Pursuant to the notice , a hearing was held on August 29 and 30 and September 3, 1940, at New York, City, before Mark Lauter, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Company and the Union appeared by representatives and partici- pated- in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to-,introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. At the close of the hearing the Union moved to amend its petition as to the approximate number of em- ployees in the bargaining unit in respect to which it alleged that a question concerning representation had arisen . This motion was granted by the Trial Examiner. The Board has reviewed the rul- ings made by the Trial Examiner during the course of,the hearing- on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, 'the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY World Steel Products Corporation is a New York corporation with its main office and principal place of business in New York City. It is engaged in the manufacture , sale, and installation of metal and metal-covered doors, frames, trim and timber products. The chief raw materials used by the Company in the course of its manufacturing operations are lumber and sheet steel . During the first 6 months of the year 1940, it purchased raw materials valued at approximately $70,000, approximately 90 percent of which were shipped to the Company's plant in New York City from sources out- side the State of New York. During the same period the Company's finished products -amounted in value to approximately $55,000, ap- proximately 20 percent of which products were shipped to points out- side the State of New York. 11. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Architectural & Engineering Guild, Local 66, International Federa- tion of Technical Engineers', Architects', & Draftsmen's Unions, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It admits to its membership employees of the Company. WORLD STEEL PRODUCTS CORPORATION 703 III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION In April and May 1940 the Union informed the Company that it represented a majority of the Company's engineering department employees and requested that the Company recognize and bargain collectively with it in behalf of such employees. The Company re- fused and still refuses to do so because of doubts regarding the ap- propriate bargaining unit and the Union's representation of a majority of the employees in such unit. From the Regional Director's written statement, introduced into evidence, it appears that the Union has substantial representation among the, Company's engineering department employees., We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has- arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT In its amended petition the 'Union claims that the appropriate bargaining unit comprises all permanent employees in the technical or engineering department, including draftsmen, supervisory drafts- men, and the lister or scheduler. At the hearing the Union and the Company agreed that the production engineer should be included in the appropriate unit, and the Company did not object to the in- clusion of its sole supervisory draftsman and its lister or scheduler. We shall include the production engineer, the supervisory drafts- man, and the lister or scheduler, if any,' in the unit. 'On August 6, 1940 , prior to the hearing, the Regional Director received four signed letters stating that the signers had signed application cards authorizing the Union to represent them in collective bargaining with any employer. The Regional Director re- ported, in substance , that all four signatures appeared to be "genuine original signatures," and were the names of persons in the alleged appropriate unit appearing on the Company's pay roll as of July 16, 1940 Although the Company claimed that there were eight em- ployees in the alleged appropriate unit, the , Regional Director stated that the said pay roll showed that there were only six therein Since July 16, 1940, two of the six employees have ]eft the Company 's employ, and the Company has hired an additional employee within the alleged unit. It therefore appears that at the time of the hearing the Union repre- sented at least two of the five employees within the said unit At present listing or scheduling is being done by the supervisory draftsmen The Com- pany has in the past employed a separate person to do this work , however, and may again employ such a person in the future. , 704 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Company employs four non-supervisory draftsmen. The Union desires to exclude one of them, Joseph Bitter, as a temporary em- ployee. The Company asserts that all four or none belong in the appropriate unit. The record shows that three of the draftsmen have, a substantial expectancy of continued employment with the Company and that no definite' date has been set for the termination of their employment. Bitter, on the other hand, is a student who was em- ployed for the summer recess. He is returning to school in Septem- ber 1940. It does not appear that he worked for the Company before or that he will again work for the Company after the 1940 school vacation. We, shall exclude Bitter from the appropriate unit but shall include the other three draftsmen. ' I The Company employs two estimators. The Union would exclude, and the Company include, them. Although estimators are normally eligible to union membership, the Union has made no attempt to organize them, either at the Company or at other companies with which it has contacts, because of the difficulty of establishing wage rates for such employees. It appears that the Union has contracts with other companies which employ both draftsmen and estimators, and that the latter are excluded from the bargaining units fixed by such contracts. As contrasted with the draftsmen who rarely, if ever, do work out- side the drafting room, the two estimators employed by the Company spend a great deal of their time on outside work. Under the direct supervision of the president of the Company, not that of the super- visory draftsman, they perform the important and responsible work of estimating the cost of executing manufacturing and construction contracts which the Company desires to secure, placing bids thereon, and making sales. They also do delicate field measurement work, sometimes supervise installation of the Company's 'products, and list materials for fabrication. They share a private office walled off from the drafting room, work only 5 days a week while the drafts- men work 51/2 days, have irregular and unusual office hours, and very seldom come into contact with the drafting room employees. They consult with the supervisory draftsman on an average of only five- times monthly and only in exceptional cases do they confer with non- supervisory draftsmen regarding drawings made pursuant to con- tracts for which they have made the estimates. The salaries of the two estimators are approximately double the average salary paid the non-supervisory draftsmen and the production engineer. Upon this record we find that the estimators do not belong in the appropriate unit. The Company employs two assistant superintendents of construc- tion,'whom the Company would include and the Union exclude. 'They WORLD STEEL PRODUCTS CORPORATION 705 are field employees who assist the Company's construction superin- tendents in overseeing the installation of the Company's doors and frames in buildings under construction. They do no inside work and only occasionally come to the engineering or drafting department to consult with draftsmen. Like the estimators and unlike the drafts- men, these two employees work only 5 days per week. Both are ap- parently graduate engineers with little or no practical experience and they earn from $3 to $10 -less per week than do the non-supervisory draftsmen. Their field work includes checking and requesting neces- sary materials, marking the places where doors and frames are to be installed in buildings under construction according to construction plans, scheduling the work of the Company's carpenters so that they may be kept busy, assuming responsibility for the latter's work in the absence of the superintendents, checking such work, and making out form reports daily -on its progress. The assistant construction super- intendents are in effect contact or liaison men for the Company and their duties are of such a non-technical nature and require so little experience that they are not eligible to the Union's niembership.3 The two assistant superintendents of construction presently em- ployed may be given miscellaneous work in the engineering depart- ment for brief intervals between the completion- of one construction project and the commencement of another. Purely temporary as- signments such as these do not entitle them to be- included -in the unit. We.find that assistant superintendents of construction should be excluded from the unit. The Company employs an assistant to its production engineer. The Company desires his inclusion within, and the Union his exclusion from, the unit. The assistant's duties include the non-technical tasks of tracing for the draftsmen, assisting the production engineer in compiling figures from time cards, filing, and attending the switch- board in the absence of the regular operator. His salary is less than half that of the average draftsman. He is ineligible to membership in the Union because of his lack of technical education or, training .and because of the non-technical and "fill-in" character of his employ- ment:. Nevertheless, his position' in effect is that of helper to the pro- duction engineer, and since the Union has agreed to the latter's inclu- sion, we find that his helper also belongs in the appropriate unit. The Company employs a shop foreman and an assistant shop fore- man. At the close of the hearing the Company -asked that they be In housing construction projects the Company is a subcontractor The Union admits to membership construction superintendents of general contractors or builders of entire projects It places such superintendents in a separate internal organizational division and conducts separate collective bargaining negotiations in their behalf, apart from its negotia- tions in behalf of engmeeriiig or technical employees 323428-42-vol 27-46 706 DECISIONS - OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD included in the unit. The Union opposes this inclusion. Although the shop forem,an and his assistant periodically confer with the super- visory draftsman and, company officials regarding practical methods of construction -and perhaps other technical problems, they are pro- duction officials stationed in the Company 's factory, which is separate from the engineering department. They appear to be ineligible to membership in the Union. We shall exclude them from the unit. We find that all employees in the technical or engineering depart- ment of the Company, including draftsmen , the supervisory drafts- man, the lister or scheduler , if any, the production engineer , and the assistant to the production engineer, but excluding estimators, as- sistant superintendents of construction , and the shop foreman and his assistant, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees of the Com- pany the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collec- tive bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot. We shall direct that those eligible to vote in the election shall be the employees within the appropriate unit who were employed by the Company during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the .date of our Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during that pay-roll period because they were ill, on vacation, ,or were then or have since been temporarily laid off, but excluding those who have since quit or been discharged -for cause. Upon -the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of World Steel 'Products, Corporation, New York City, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and _(7) of the Act. 2. All employees in the technical or engineering department of the Company, including draftsmen , the supervisory draftsman, the lister or scheduler, if any, the production engineer , and the assistant to the production engineer, but excluding estimators , assistant super- intendents of construction , and the shop foreman and his assistant, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain- ing, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. WORLD STEEL PRODUCTS CORPORATION 707 DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue, of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED , that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with World Steel Products Corporation , New York City, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction of Elections under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules - and Regulations, among all employees in the technical or engineering department of World Steel Products Corporation who were employed by it during the pay-roll period immediately pre- ceding the date of this Direction of Election, including draftsmen, the supervisory draftsman, the lister or scheduler, if any, the production engineer , the assistant to the production engineer , and employees who ,did not work during that pay-roll period because they were ill, on vacation, or were then or have since been temporarily laid off, but excluding estimators , assistant superintendents of construction, the shop foreman and his assistant ; and those who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Architectural & Engineering Guild, Local 66, International Federation of Technical Engineers', Architects', & Draftsmen's Unions, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining. I